Month: February 2014

I took a gander at the 2010, 2011, and 2012 GED total scores by race and nation (from “GED Testing Statistical Reports”). The sample sizes were small. Unfortunately, the earlier reports, which go back to the ’80s didn’t provide scores for Bermuda, the Virgin Islands, and Jamaica+Cayman+St.Martin; as these scores were what I was particularly curious about, I didn’t include scores from earlier years. The scores aren’t representative, etc., etc. but they, nonetheless, provide a tad of info on e.g., (self-identified) ethnic differences in Bermuda. The score were averaged across the three years mentioned. The d-values presented at the bottom are inter-national. Those presented on the right are intra-national. The differences are roughly consistent with Richard Lynn’s Global Bell Curve position.

Previously, we looked at the association between L&V’s (2012) National IQs, GMAT scores, and English Proficiency scores. We extend that analysis here by including 2010-2012 GRE (quantitative, verbal, and total) scores, 2010 + 2012 TOEFL scores, 2003-2009 migrant PISA scores, and national numeracy rates from the 19th and early 20th century.

The GMAT is a graduate entrance test used by more than 5,900 business programs offered by more than 2,100 universities worldwide. While the test is given in English, it is designed to be as minimally English dependent as necessary to predict successful completion of Business programs taught in English. Further, the test is carefully scrutinized for item bias. Rudner (2012) explains:

Yes, the GMAT test is administered in English and is designed for programs that teach in English. But the required English skill level is much less than what students will need in the classroom. The exam requires just enough English to allow us to adequately and comprehensively assess Verbal reasoning, Quantitative reasoning and Integrated Reasoning skills….

We carefully review our questions using criteria defining good item construction. We also compute statistics to assess whether our questions are appropriate across culture groups. We constantly update guidelines for our item writers, including a master list of terms and phrases to avoid in order to assure cultural fairness. By using carefully defined and thorough item development and review processes, along with statistical analyses to flag questions with possible cultural bias, we have developed a test that minimizes the impact of culture and language. The GMAT exam is the best objective measure of the likelihood of success in management programs across the globe.

Despite the claimed lack of bias and apparent predictive validity of the test, there is substantial global variance in scores. Rudner (2012) attributes this variance largely to differences in native language spoken and to differences in self-selection.

We decided to explore to what extent global differences could be accounted for differences in National IQ. To do this, we examined the relation between measures of national cognitive ability, English language proficiency, English language usage, and GMAT scores by reported citizenship. We also sought to determine to what extent GMAT scores could be used to index the National IQs for poorly investigated regions such as North Korea, Rwanda, and St. Kitts.